Remove Saved Spotify Albums

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already indicate destructive and idempotent behavior. The description adds value by disclosing that the tool will 'verify the resulting state once' after removal, which is not captured in the annotations. It also confirms the destructive nature via 'Remove'. No contradiction with annotations.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single, well-structured sentence that front-loads the core action ('Remove exact Spotify album IDs') and appends a concise behavioral note. Every word adds value, with no fluff or repetition of schema details.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a simple removal tool with one parameter, an output schema, and robust annotations, the description is sufficiently complete. It covers the purpose and adds the verification behavior. It does not detail error handling or side effects, but the annotations (destructiveHint, openWorldHint) and simple scope make that acceptable.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The schema has one self-explanatory parameter, album_ids, with 0% description coverage. The description's phrase 'exact Spotify album IDs' reinforces the parameter's meaning and adds the nuance of exact ID matching, but it does not describe the array structure or constraints. Given the low coverage, the description partially compensates by clarifying the semantic of the parameter, but it relies on the parameter name for structure.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the action ('Remove'), the resource ('Spotify album IDs'), and the scope ('through the current shared library endpoint'), which distinguishes it from sibling tools like spotify_library_remove (which likely handles tracks). The word 'exact' further clarifies that it operates on specific IDs, not names or search results.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description gives clear context: it is for removing specific album IDs via the library endpoint. It does not explicitly name alternatives or say 'use this instead of X', but the album-specific wording implicitly differentiates it from general library removal. The 'verify the resulting state once' provides a procedural hint, though it does not specify when not to use it.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.